Archive for the ‘THE BAD DUDES’ Category

Van Jones said that he and environmentalists stayed quiet during the BP oil disaster in 2010 because Barack Obama was president — and admitted he would have “been out there with a sign protesting” had George W. Bush or John McCain been occupying the White House.

Jones, Obama’s former green energy adviser, made the comments during a recent interview on C-SPAN’s Book TV:

“I’m critical of myself, first, and the environmentalists. When the oil spill that happened in the spring of 2010, there was another moment to say, ‘Hold on a second, let’s re-look at energy policy in America. Should we be subsidizing companies that are risking our health immediately and in the long-term?‘ We didn’t do it. You’ve never seen the environmental movement more quiet during an oil spill. I guarantee you, if John McCain had been president, with that oil spill, or George Bush had been president with that oil spill, I’d have been out there with a sign protesting. I didn’t, because of who the president was. Well, that’s a bad, uh, uh…that’s not good for the earth, it’s not good for the cause, it’s probably not good for the president. It’s certainly not the way we should conduct ourselves. And so, I’m very tough on progressive movements and leaders, including myself, who did not stand on principle, based on who we looked across and saw as president.” Source

In a blatant act of hypocrisy the Obama Administration plans to cut health benefits for active duty and retired military personnel but leaving unionized defense workers at current levels.

Bill Gertz reported at the Washington Beacon, that Congressional Republicans are saying this is a blatant attempt to force military servicemen into Obamacare.

Gertz also said,

“The proposed increases in health care payments by service members, which must be approved by Congress, are part of the Pentagon’s $487 billion cut in spending. It seeks to save $1.8 billion from the Tricare medical system in the fiscal 2013 budget, and $12.9 billion by 2017.”

This is a plan that is sure to enrage Congressional Republicans and cause a big fight on Capital Hill.

Military personnel would see their annual Tricare premiums increase anywhere from 30 – 78 percent in the first year, followed by sharply increased premiums “ranging from 94 percent to 345 percent—more than 3 times current levels.”

Gertz added,

“According to congressional assessments, a retired Army colonel with a family currently paying $460 a year for health care will pay $2,048,”

Pharmaceutical benefits for military personnel would also increase under the proposed plan.

Although military families have long had to deal with low salaries and rough working conditions, solid health care benefits has always been a draw to career soldiers. The military is worried this is going to hurt recruitment and retention.

John Hayward of Human Events adds:

“Veterans will also be hit with a new annual fee for a program called Tricare for Life, on top of the monthly premiums they already pay, while some benefits will become “means-tested” in the manner of a social program – treating them like welfare instead of benefits for military service. Naturally, this is all timed to begin next year and “avoid upsetting military voters in a presidential election year,”

Next month there are going to be hearings about the new health care rules and opposition to the policies is already building. The VFW, one of the largest military organizations in the country, has “called on all military personnel and the veterans’ community to block the health care increases.”

Others are concerned about the double standard being set between uniformed military personnel – who are not unionized – and civilian defense workers who belong to public sector unions.

According to a Congressional Aide,

“We all recognize that we are in a time of austerity. But defense has made up to this point 50 percent of deficit reduction cuts that we agreed to, but is only 20 percent of the budget. The administration is asking troops to get by without the equipment and force levels needed for global missions. And now they are going to them again and asking them to pay more for their health care when you’ve held the civilian workforce at DoD and across the federal government virtually harmless in all of these cuts. And it just doesn’t seem fair,”

Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon, Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee said,

“We shouldn’t ask our military to pay our bills when we aren’t willing to impose a similar hardship on the rest of the population. We can’t keep asking those who have given so much to give that much more,”

McKeon will be joined by some 5 million members of 32 military service and veterans groups, according to retired Navy Capt. Kathryn M. Beasley of the Military Officers Association of America, who called the plan “a breach of faith.”

In a vote hardly mentioned by the mainstream media, 142 House Democrats favored an amendment that in essence demands Obama Attorney General Eric Holder stop lying to Congress – as well as preventing the Obama Department of Justice from suing over voter I.D. laws.
The House Wednesday evening voted overwhelmingly to prevent the Justice Department from using taxpayer funds to lie to Congress.
The vote came in a Wednesday evening series of amendments to a bill, H.R. 5326, funding the Justice Department for 2013. Members approved the language in a 381-41 vote; all 41 “no” votes came from Democrats, although 142 Democrats voted with Republicans in support of the amendment.

Video shows Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) claiming that coal power and corn syrup are more deadly than terrorism.

The remarks will likely prove a headache for an administration that is trying to distance itself from its anti-coal image.

As Scribe reported on Friday, the Obama campaign adjusted its website to promote its work with “clean coal” in the wake of an embarrassing showing in the Democratic primary in coal-intensive West Virginia. Obama lost 41% of the vote there to federal prison inmate – a fact the state’s Democratic Party chairman attributed directly to the administration’s stance on coal power.

by AWR Hawkins
During a trip through Colorado in December of last year, President Obama spoke of his intention to implement his economic policies with or without the approval of Congress. Said Obama, “And where Congress is not willing to act, we’re going to go ahead and do it ourselves.” It now appears that such a mindset applies not only to economic matters but to the distribution of foreign aid as well–in particular, foreign military aid for the Muslim Brotherhood, who now hold the reigns in Egypt.
Congress has restricted and, in fact, halted military aid to Egypt until and “unless the State Department certifies that Egypt is making progress on basic freedoms and human rights.” After all, Christians and other practitioners of non-Islamic religions have had a tough go of it there. And of course, many Egyptian officials harbor such hatred toward the U.S. that one of the candidates for the Egyptian presidency has openly referred to America as the “infidel country” in media interviews.
Nevertheless, the news breaking now is that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will soon announce that President Obama will “resume funding for Egypt’s military, despite Congressional restrictions and objections from human rights and democracy advocates.”
Even Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-VT), a man with whom I’ve never agreed on anything, sees the foolishness of this endeavor: “I believe [sending the aid] would be a mistake. The new [restrictions were] intended to put the United States squarely on the side of the Egyptian people who seek a civilian government that respects fundamental freedoms and the rule of law, and to clearly define the terms of our future relations with the Egyptian military.”
Who knows; perhaps the Obama administration can also circumvent Congress and give the Iranians some nuclear materials or give Hamas some advanced weaponry? I know both ideas sound crazy, but they’re no crazier than giving $1.5 billion in military aid to the Muslim Brotherhood.

David Brock is the founder of the ultra-liberal Media Matters for America. At one time, he played the role of a conservative journalist during the 1990s when he wrote the book The Real Anita Hill (1993) and authored the Troopergate story which led to Paula Jones filing a lawsuit against Bill Clinton. Brock is like Arianna Huffington, co-founder of the news website The Huffington Post, who also masqueraded as a conservative before returning to her liberal roots and becoming a mouthpiece for leftist causes. Like Brock, Huffington is a political opportunist.

David Brock has had it in for conservatives ever since he revealed that he came out as a homosexual and was not embraced by his conservative friends. He disavows his former political tactics as a conservative in his book Blinded by the Right: The Conscience of an Ex-Conservative. The book has been described as “a public act of political atonement.” Here’s how Frank Bruni of The New York Times describes Brock’s motives for righting Blinded by the Right:

“Brock wants us to know that he did people wrong, and that he recognizes it. He wants us to understand that he was chasing fame and fleeing personal demons, and that the velocity of those efforts distracted him from the unwarranted damage he caused. And he wants us to believe him.”

One would think that such a confession would lead him to change his tactics. But it hasn’t happened as anyone who has ever read anything from Media Matters knows. Now we learn that Brock had a very specific agenda in starting the non-profit, tax-exempt Media Matters. It would be fighting against businesses, wealthy Americans, and conservative Christians.

“Media Matters for America (MMA) believes that news reporting and analysis by the American media, with its eye on profit margin and preservation of the status quo, has become biased,” read the group’s application, obtained by The Daily Caller, “It is common for news and commentary by the press to present viewpoints that tend to overly promote corporate interests, the rights of the wealthy, and a conservative, Christian-influenced ideology.”

Does any of this sound eerily familiar? This was the same tactic used by the Nazis against Jews. “The Nazi regime employed propaganda to impress upon German civilians and soldiers that the Jews were . . . dangerous enemies of the German Reich.” Jews were political scapegoats, a religious race to blame for Germany’s troubles. Media Matters and other liberal groups are following a similar methodology. Unless Christians can be shut up, we will never have any social progress.

After months on the sidelines, major liberal donors including the financier George Soros are preparing to inject up to $100 million into independent groups to aid Democrats’ chances this fall. But instead of going head to head with the conservative “super PACs” and outside groups that have flooded the presidential and Congressional campaigns with negative advertising, the donors are focusing on grass-roots organizing, voter registration and Democratic turnout.

The financier George Soros is expected to contribute $1 million each to a rights group and a research “super PAC.”

The departure from the conservatives’ approach, which helped Republicans wrest control of the House in 2010, partly reflects liberal donors’ objections to the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, which paved the way for super PACs and unbridled campaign spending.

But in interviews, donors and strategists involved in the effort said they also did not believe they could match advertising spending by leading conservative groups likeAmerican Crossroads and Americans for Prosperity, and instead wanted to exploit what they see as the Democrats’ advantage in grass-roots organizing.

“Super PACs are critically important,” said Rob Stein, the founder of the Democracy Alliance, a group of liberal donors who will convene near Miami this week to discuss where to steer their money this year. But the liberal groups, he said, believe that local efforts and outreach through social media “can have an enormous impact in battleground states in 2012.”

In a move likely to draw in other major donors, Mr. Soros will contribute $1 million each to America Votes, a group that coordinates political activity for left-leaning environmental, abortion rights and civil rights groups, and American Bridge 21st Century, a super PAC that focuses on election-oriented research. The donations will be Mr. Soros’s first major contributions of the 2012 election cycle.

“George Soros believes the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United opened the floodgates to special interests’ paying for political ads,” said Michael Vachon, a spokesman for Mr. Soros. “There is no way those concerned with the public interest can compete with them. Soros has always focused his political giving on grass-roots organizing and holding conservatives accountable for the flawed policies they promote. His support of these groups is consistent with those views.”

On Monday, in an indication that he does not expect significant advertising spending from Democratic-leaning outside groups at this stage, President Obama unveiled a $25 million ad campaign against Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican nominee.

A super PAC founded by two former Obama aides, Priorities USA Action, has struggled to raise money against better-financed conservative groups like American Crossroads, which expects to spend $300 million on the presidential, House and Senate elections.

Those difficulties stem in part from Mr. Obama’s past opposition to spending by outside groups, which has dampened donor enthusiasm despite his about-face this year. But it also reflects how major liberal donors and independent groups have focused since 2004 on creating a permanent infrastructure of liberal research and voter-outreach groups. That year, liberal groups spent more than $200 million on advertising and grass-roots activity in a failed bid to deprive President George W. Bush of a second term.

Conservative independent groups, including super PACs that can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money on election ads, dominated the advertising wars in 2010, helping Republicans make major gains in Congress, and their money has had a similar impact so far in this cycle.

“The idea that we’re going to engage in an arms race on advertising with the Republicans is not appealing to many liberal donors,” said David Brock, the founder of American Bridge 21st Century.

The advertising-oriented Democratic super PACs, including Priorities USA and two groups founded to back Democrats in Congress, remain on the list of organizations that the Democracy Alliance recommends to its members. Robert McKay, who is the chairman of the Democracy Alliance and sits on the board of Priorities USA, said the $100 million expected to be spent this year by alliance members would include some money for election ads, but would most likely favor grass-roots organizing and research groups.

“There is a bias towards funding infrastructure as it relates to the elections,” Mr. McKay said. “That means get-out-the-vote efforts” directed toward young voters, single women, black voters and Latinos, he said.

Organizations likely to be a part of the effort include Catalist, which creates voter lists for allied liberal groups; ProgressNow, a network of state-based Web sites for liberal opinion and activism; and the Latino Engagement Fund, a new group that works to register and turn out Latino voters for Democrats. Conservative independent groups are financing similar outreach to Latino voters: the American Action Network, which spent $26 million against Democratic candidates in 2010, last year unveiled the Hispanic Leadership Network, which will seek to mobilize center-right Latino voters.

Liberals outside the Democracy Alliance are also likely to make significant contributions, as are labor unions, which plan to spend up to $400 million on state, local and federal races, and advocacy groups like the Sierra Club.

Some groups will pay for both advertising and organizing. PAC+, a super PAC founded by the San Francisco philanthropist Steve Phillips, a member of the Democracy Alliance, expects to spend about $10 million on Latino voters in six states, with a heavy emphasis on Arizona, which the Obama campaign is seeking to turn into a battleground. Half of PAC+ spending will go to enrollment and half to advertising.

“You can dump 10 or 20 million in TV ads in Ohio and try to reach the persuadable swing voters there, or you can up voter turnout among Latinos in Colorado and Arizona and win that way,” Mr. Phillips said. “It’s much cheaper.”

On Meet the Press this morning, Joe Biden tangled himself and the Obama Administration up when he appeared to endorse gay marriage.

In the past, President Obama has, in what may be a political ruse, refused to endorse gay marriage. He famously said his own view on gay marriage has been “evolving.” But the Vice President, who usually speaks as a surrogate for the Administration, was more explicit on the subject:

“I am absolutely comfortable with the fact that men marrying men, women marrying women, and heterosexual men and women marrying another are entitled to the same exact rights, all the civil rights, all the civil liberties. And quite frankly, I don’t see much of a distinction– beyond that,” Biden replied.

His answer was somewhat muddled, and prefaced by a sort of disclaimer — “I am vice president of the United States of America. The president sets the policy.” — but chaotic, immediate reactions from his advisors and from Obama’s suggested he had gone too far.

In the middle of an event to extol the virtues of the U.S. Constitution and “American Laws For American Courts,” the audience learned first-hand how easy it is to lose their freedom of Speech and Assembly.

Amid shouts of “What about free speech?” from the audience, the Allegan Police Department ordered the event shut-down. School officials notified police that they had received a letter complaining about the event from Dawud Walid, Executive Director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-MI). The letter asked the school to disallow the event despite an existing contract. CAIR was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorism funding trial in U. S. history, U.S. v. Holy Land Foundation.
As a result, the Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, announced today that the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR- MI), its Executive Director, the City of Allegan, the Allegan Police Department and the School District were named as defendants in a thirty-four page civil rights lawsuit filed in the Federal District Court for the Western District of Michigan, this morning. The claims included constitutional and contract violations.

A Muslim Brotherhood front group, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) will hold a pro-shariah Conference in Tampa, Florida on May 11 – 13, 2012. The Conference will be at the Hilton Hotel Airport 2225 North Lois Avenue, Tampa FL. ISNA is a cultural jihad organization that has been designated as an “un-indicted co-conspirator” in the federal terrorism financing case called – Holy land Foundation Trial. The Muslim Brotherhood is actively working to get President Obama re-elected. Join with many patriotic Americans as we stand against the Muslim Brotherhood in Florida. For details contact — Info@TheUnitedWest.org

by Jerry McConnell

The Washington Times published an Editorial on April 20, 2012 titled, “Where’s the recovery?” It mirrored all the bad news on our supposed “getting healthy” economy along with the discouraging views of the economic fundamentals and new jobless claims creating long faces and nervous hair pulling, while smiles abound in our anti-American White House and among its inhabitants.

Believe it or not, all this bad news about the country that less than four years ago was considered the greatest nation in the world, is pleasing to our White House staff and all of its minions, czars and secretaries. Obama’s mission is to totally destroy America as the world has known it for the past two hundred and thirty plus years and see poverty and hardships abound where once the fruits of our forebears’ diligence and INTELLIGENCE (a commodity that is sorely lacking today) created prosperity and leadership for the entire world to follow.

People SHOULD be asking, where the recovery is; it is certainly costing the taxpayers huge sums of money to keep this charlatan in the Oval Office in spending money for his communist, socialist and Islamist buddies in the depths and pestholes of the world. He is determined to put all of us along side those sand-flea-bitten cretins he calls peaceful and enlightened.
The Times editorial announces that new jobless claims are the highest they’ve been since late January, the four-week average stubbornly hovering around the 375,000 mark. They also say that “Though we’re technically in a recovery, nobody believes it. A Rasmussen Reports survey earlier this week shows a majority is under the impression America is still in recession.” And why not? Recoveries see indicators of increased employment, more consumer goods being manufactured and purchased and costs of consumables dropping instead of rising as they are today.

One can imagine the smiles on Obama’s and his staff’s faces when they hear about another huge increase in the cost of a gallon of gas at the pumps. Just like the mythical Midas whose magic touch turned the item touched into gold, probably smiling until he died of hunger these greedy thieves will get their just dues one of these days.

As the editorial states, the country needs an explosion of industry but all Obama is producing is a fizzle. The Philadelphia Reserve Bank found manufacturing output growth slowed slightly in the mid-Atlantic region, with its index of general business activity for the factory sector falling from 12.5 in March to 8.5 in April. Numbers such as those do nothing to restore the confidence in America’s economic indicators. They tend to keep people wondering when the great “messiah” they foolishly elected in November 2008 will begin delivering on his failed promises of “change for a better
America.”

When the people don’t feel good about their future they don’t invest in homes and as stated in the editorial, with a significant chunk of the market still in the process of foreclosure, housing won’t recover anytime soon.

The economy is having a difficult time as consumer prices continue to spiral upwards; all of which Obama and his people continue to do absolutely nothing to remedy. As I stated above, this all fits in nicely with Obama’s desires, particularly when oil and gas prices escalate with no efforts from the White House to suppress or turn around the rises.

Not too long ago Obama had an opportunity to make the price of oil take a nose dive when the Keystone XL pipeline was presented for his approval and he rejected it with some spurious reasoning. We all remember a few years back when the last petroleum price explosion was about to hit and all it took to get the OPEC producers to drop the price was the renewal of talk amongst Republican politicos to open new area for domestic drilling for oil. The prices tumbled to nearly half of what they reached.

This Administration, under the usurper Obama, makes no attempt to even talk about oil production increases for America; he instead denigrates the idea until his serfs in the Democrat Party back off in fear of losing favor with him. These wimps have all joined Obama’s socialist-communist planning for the U. S. and oppose any efforts that would be beneficial for the country.

BILL AYERS TO UNIVERSITY STUDENTS: AMERICA‘S ’GAME IS OVER‘ AND ’ANOTHER WORLD’ IS COMING

Bill Ayers spoke at the University of Oregon last week on the subject of teaching and organizing for “social justice.” His speech was not free of the radical sentiments he is well-known for espousing (especially in the company of America’s youth). Case in point: he spoke of the end of America, a new world, and what our role ought to be in all of it.

(Related: Bill Ayers: ‘I Get Up Every Morning and Think…Today I’m Going to End Capitalism)

Almost as interesting as Ayers’ speech itself, perhaps, was how the leftist radical was introduced by the university students. One girl, who described herself as a doctoral student at the university, spoke of the privilege they would have with their honored guest, in an “evening [of] radical imagination.”

Two others, an associate professor at the university and a graduate student, remarked: “Most of us have in one way or another acknowledged the sovereign authority of the U.S. government– or the state of Oregon– in order to be here tonight, either admission to the university, applying for a job, or just paying the parking meter. We have not, however, asked permission of the [Native Americans] whose ancestral home this is, and to fail to acknowledge that this remains disputed territory would in effect be taking sides, [and] reinforce the erasure of indigenous history and indigenous peoples.”

When Ayers spoke, it was largely of how the “American Empire” is over, and what this means for her citizens (though there was a fair amount of “the wasteful American” theme throughout as well):
The great challenge for our generation [is] to find a way not just to live differently as individuals, but to find a way to think differently about what work means, to think differently about citizenship means, to think differently about what it means to be a ‘citizen of the world.’ One of the great dangers that we live in right now, is I don‘t think there’s any question, and I don’t think any of you would question, that the American Empire is in decline–that economically, and politically, and in some ways culturally, that we are in decline. And yet, the United States remains the most powerful, weaponized military system the Earth has ever known.
That’s a treacherous combination. A declining economic power, and an expanding military power. And we are going to have to find ways to re-imagine what it means to live in this coun–in this world. And here we are 4% of the world’s population, 4.5% of the world’s population, consuming vast amounts of natural resources, consuming vast amounts of finished goods, and no politician will say that the empire is declining and that the game is over.
It’s over. Now what? [Emphasis added]
Perhaps we will transform into a Euro-style state, though that was not a peaceful transition for Europeans, Ayers noted:

And you know, my optimistic friends say: “Oh boy, we’re going to look like Germany, or England, or France,“ and I think ”Jeese.” I mean, first of all, for England and France and Germany to become non-empires it took the deaths of millions and millions of people, so let’s remember that.
On a less chilling, and far more familiar note, Ayers called Republicans racist militants:

But let’s also remember that as power shifts, and as people feel something changing, they can either embrace it as a possible good thing in the world, or they can hold on to and become more, you know, reactionary. More racist, more militaristic, and that’s happening too. So it shouldn’t surprise us to see the Republican primaries.
I don’t know about you but I watch the debates as if watching a train wreck, I mean I was just fascinated with it– my wife is just sickened by it– but, I thought it was interesting and also telling that that is a tendency that we’re going to see more and more of.
But how does the leftist radical see the world from here? With all of the protests and the great changes throughout the world, what does Bill Ayers see for our future?

And that means, for me that means, that it’s our responsibility to fight here and now for a little more democracy, a little more participation, a little more peace, and keep putting our shoulder on that wheel because the opposition is fighting for– you know, another world is definitely coming, but that doesn‘t mean it’s going to be a better world, and it’s our responsibility to jump in.

Movement trying to distance itself from anarchy ring

by AARON KLEIN

The FBI criminal complaint seems to go to great lengths to not mention Occupy. Instead, the 21-page document – reviewed by WND – refers a number of times to “events” attended by the suspects. The “events” were Occupy protests.

Get Aaron Klein’s “Red Army: The Radical Network that must be defeated to save America” from WND’s Superstore

WND was first to report last week that Occupy had partnered with anarchy groups to engage in joint “direct action.”

Douglas L. Wright, 26; Brandon L. Baxter, 20; and Anthony Hayne, 35; were arrested yesterday by members of the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force on charges of conspiracy and attempted use of explosive materials to damage property affecting interstate commerce.

Also arrested were Connor C. Stevens, 20; and Joshua S. Stafford, 23. Charges are pending against them.

The FBI said it had a source and an undercover agent who infiltrated the anarchy ring, which plotted to detonate the explosives last night on Ohio’s Route 82 Brecksville-Northfield High Level Bridge.

The bridge carries a four-lane highway over part of the Cuyahoga Valley National Park in the Brecksville area, about 15 miles south of downtown Cleveland, the FBI said.

Occupy members

Multiple news media outlets today quoted sources in the Cleveland-area Occupy as recognizing the suspects.

Johnny Peskar, an Occupy leader, told msnbc.com that Occupy organizers had seen a few in the plot hanging around earlier events, but their actions were “autonomous,” he said.

“We don’t need any implications in this nonsense,” Peskar said.

Occupy Cleveland canceled today’s May Day protests upon news of the arrests.

The London Daily Mail also quoted an Occupy Cleveland member as saying at least some of the suspects had attended the group’s events.

WND found Baxter was described in March as an “Occupy member” by Cleveland’s Plain Dealer newspaper.

On March 5, the paper reported that “five members of Occupy Cleveland were arrested Monday after they protested property foreclosures by interrupting a sheriff’s sale.”

The paper quoted “Brandon Baxter of Lakewood” as saying “he had no regrets for making sure people heard the message.” The FBI document notes Baxter is from Lakewood.

Continued Baxter: “I took the risk of getting arrested because I feel the powers that be, whoever they might be – on all levels of government and those who hold corporate power – are not listening because not enough people are actually taking a stance” against foreclosures, he said.

“I was hoping that this would be a great way to get Cleveland more involved by showing the potential that a small group of dedicated people can have in making an impact. Even though we are not in any government position or in Congress, we do have the power.”

WND further found that Baxter set up an Occupy Facebook page titled “Stand with the Occupy Movement Against Suppression!”

The FBI complaint, meanwhile, seems to go out of its way to not mention Occupy. It details how a confidential FBI source attended an Oct. 21 protest “event” and “identified four suspicious males with walkie-talkie radios around their necks.” Three of the four had masks covering their faces.

While the event referenced wasn’t named, that very day Occupy Cleveland held its Occupy the Banks operation.

One suspect, Wright, said he believed leaders at the “event” were conspiring with corporate America and police, and he needed to recruit from outside that group, in homeless shelters and neighborhoods, the FBI complaint states.

The FBI document described how an undercover agent sold faulty C4 explosives to the group, purportedly to be detonated on the bridge last night in the lead up to today’s nationwide May Day protests.

The FBI document relates that at end of March, Baxter talked about getting a permit for an “upcoming festival” in Cleveland and believed he was going to have a difficult time getting one.

Once again, the FBI document doesn’t identify the festival. However, WND found that “Occupy and Friends” in April announced its “Occupy the Heart Street Festival.”

Occupy partners with anarchy group

While Occupy leaders attempt to distance their group from the Ohio anarchists, WND reported last week Occupy has partnered with an anarchy movement to deploy joint chaotic actions aimed at protesting capitalism.

Two weeks ago, Occupy D.C. and an anti-capitalist group calling itself the Anarchist Alliance D.C. Network caused a ruckus at an International Monetary Fund convention. Protesters reportedly attached climbing ropes to security barricades outside the main IMF entry checkpoint and pulled them down. Other ropes were used to pull down obstacles along the path delegates used to attend the meetings.

Protesters stormed several hotels where IMF delegates were staying, including the Washington Circle Hotel and the Mayflower.

A Facebook “anarchy” page was created in the run-up to the IMF event. The page, titled “Anarchy Spring training and IMF protest in DC-April 19th to 20th-2012,” served as an online planning forum.

The Occupy Wall Street website initiated a subsection titled “anarchy” in which related events are posted. The site boasts of a Manhattan protest earlier this month, following an anarchy book fair, in which agitators marched through the streets turning over trash cans and spraying anarchy symbols on local businesses. Protesters reportedly used eight-foot-long metal pipes to smash the windows of a Starbucks in New York’s East Village.

One group, calling itself the First of May Anarchist Alliance, has partnered with Occupy to protest the Trayvon Martin shooting.

The anarchy tactics apparently come directly from the playbook of a direct-action organization known as the Ruckus Society, which helped to spark the 1999 World Trade Organization protests in Seattle that turned violent.

Ruckus is directly tied to Occupy. WND previously reported how official direct-action training resources for Occupy events include several manuals from the Ruckus Society.

Ruckus was also listed as a “friend and partner” of Occupy events, including the movement’s Days of Action held in October 2011.

Ruckus is funded by the George Soros-financed Tides Center, which has been involved in Occupy since the movement’s onset.

Another grantee of Tides is the Adbusters magazine, which first announced the Occupy movement. MoveOn.org, which has joined Occupy, is funded by Tides.

With research by Brenda J. Elliott

From where I stand I believe we have reached the cliffs edge and we are looking over into the abyss
The US State Departments very recent commitment to Agenda 21 tells me this directive has many more tentacles than once thought!

The US State Department verbalizing support for Agenda 21 is probably our final death nail on our way to true Socialism and a definitive loss of our property rights and our freedoms we now enjoy!

Once we are fully committed to this, we will not turn it around! The world we know right this minute will not exist in it’s current form! Our once great country is turning into a Socialist state, complete with it’s brainwashed participants. We have turned the corner and are into the home stretch!

I still believe we can stop it! Join the fight, become aware for your self! Care about your country! We are the last bastion before Socialism takes hold! I hate to sound like chicken little, but very soon the sky will fall and we are gonna look up from the rubble and proclaim “why didn’t someone tell me?” “Where was my warning?”

Objectives of the UN Conference on Sustainable Development

The United States is pleased to participate in the PrepCom and to contribute to a successful Rio 2012 Conference on Sustainable Development. We have developed a robust process within our government to evaluate how far we have come since Rio, and to identify gaps that we need to address and emerging issues where we need to make progress. This effort is reinvigorating discussions on sustainable development within our government as we work together to identify shortcomings and replicate successes, and to avail ourselves of new science, information, technologies, and collaborations to make real progress toward achieving sustainable development.

In doing this, we increasingly understand that, while the United Nations and national governments are essential to sustainable development, our participation alone is not sufficient for achieving meaningful progress that improves people’s lives and the environment. We are beginning to engage our stakeholders – including nongovernmental organizations, the private sector, local and regional governments, and academia – all of which have important contributions to make to this process.

In this vein, a concise political document should only be a part of the outcome. We also need to look to major groups and stakeholders to bring forward good ideas and take on commitments and actions. Sustainable development can only be achieved when we enable all citizens and empower all stakeholders to take action to achieve a sustainable future. We need to invest in people, recognizing women and youth as key agents of change in society. We need to promote human capacity development through education, especially in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, and to enable the development of skill sets vital to emerging sectors of the economy. development path.

The partnership approach out of the World Summit on Sustainable Development continues to be an important tool for achieving sustainable development, and we should look at how we can strengthen and further legitimize this approach. For example, our domestic policy on innovation realizes that governments can catalyze and leverage action across stakeholders, provide enabling frameworks and incentives for private sector investment, invest in people, and facilitate meaningful collaborations across all stakeholders. Together, we can address market failures, invest in sciences and innovation, develop human capacity to meet today’s challenges, and adapt solutions for local contexts.

Good governance at all levels is critical to our ability to make good on our Agenda 21 commitments. While national governments will make the political commitments, we rely upon regional and local governments to implement new policies in the context of local situations, to enforce environmental regulations, to innovate and adapt solutions that will succeed in unique environmental, social, and political realities. Some of the most creative solutions to our sustainable development challenges are emerging in the U.S. from our state, regional and local governments. We should encourage communities to do integrated planning, to develop sustainability plans and a local Agenda 21.

Cities are hotspots for population growth, investment, and increasing demand for energy, water, food, buildings and waste disposal. Rapid urbanization is a challenge and an opportunity to focus our global efforts to minimize impacts from this development, to develop state-of-the-art disaster preparedness plans, to integrate planning with smarter designs, to build more livable communities and to address the needs of the poorest of the poor. With good governance and sound planning we can implement solutions that address the needs of people and promote inclusive growth that works for all strata of society. We can identify and leverage solutions to improve access to water, sanitation, food, and energy that will help us to achieve the Millennium Development Goals.

Chair, we support the Rio 2012 process and the need to review our progress and to identify gaps and emerging challenges. We want Rio 2012 to be forward looking, to address ways that we can learn from past struggles, build on our successes, and achieve a sustainable future. We believe that all countries should be able to monitor natural resources and make informed and integrated decisions about their development paths. We support efforts to measure progress and to share information and best practices.

Our challenges are significant. We recognize that economic growth is an essential component of any sustainable development strategy. But economic growth should not and does not need to be “development at all costs.” It should be balanced in a way that takes into consideration the environment, natural resource, and social dimensions, addressing poverty and improving the status of women. This is a challenging objective, but one toward which we are making great strides. We are committed to this process and to working with all stakeholders to identify actions we can take reinvigorate our commitments and to harness 21st century tools and human capacity to achieve sustainable development.

EAG.org released this must-see video today on the Wisconsin socialist protest movement. The Wisconin protests last year were a preview of what was to come from the orchestrated Occupy Wall Street protests. The video explains like never before how the left uses chaos and violence to move their selfish platform forward.

EAGnews.org has produced an exclusive video report disclosing who and what were behind the massive demonstrations, the occupation of the Capitol in Madison, and extreme tactics employed to stop Walker’s reforms from being enacted.

Titled “Anarchy 101: How Wisconsin’s Left Embraces Chaos,” the report takes us through the protests, legal challenges and subsequent recall efforts of 2011 and 2012. It features Brett Healy and Brian Fraley of the MacIver Institute, Collin Roth of Media Trackers, an unidentified citizen journalist on the ground for many of the protests, and State Sen. Alberta Darling, a target of death threats, intimidation tactics, and a failed recall attempt last year.

It also features two teachers, including Kenosha’s Kristi Lacroix, and a school board member who would not be silenced by the radicals’ intimidation tactics and spoke to EAGnews about the benefits of Scott Walker’s reforms.

By the way…….
GP has a Drudge hit today so we cut back on the blogposts per page for a while to help handle the traffic.

BY MATTHEW VADUM

The mysterious disappearance of the Secretary of State Project.

Whatever happened to the left-wing Secretary of State Project liberals promised would save our elections from the dirty tricks of those dang lowdown, yellow-bellied, lily-livered Republicans?
The evidence now suggests that the election-stealing, George Soros-funded so-called “527″ political committee is dead, or perhaps just deeply sedated. This group that section 527 of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code allows to accept unlimited financial contributions was created solely to rig elections for Democrats.
It accomplishes this by electing permissive liberal Democrats as secretaries of state. In most states the secretary of state is the chief elections officer, so putting left-wingers in the often-overlooked but critically important office allows these political radicals to manipulate the electoral process. This is what liberals call “election protection.”
Billionaire donor Soros, whom Saturday Night Live has mocked as the “owner” of the Democratic Party, underwrote the Secretary of State Project in order to help Democrats gain an unfair advantage on Election Day. Soros and progressives all across the fruited plain believe with a religious fervor that right-leaning secretaries of state helped the GOP steal the presidential elections in Florida in 2000 (Katherine Harris) and in Ohio in 2004 (Ken Blackwell).
For years Soros’s ultra-wealthy colleagues in the Democracy Alliance, a billionaires’ club that funds left-wing political infrastructure, opened their wallets to help secretary of state candidates endorsed by the SoS Project. They helped to elect Saul Alinsky-inspired community organizer Mark Ritchie, the ACORN-loving Minnesota secretary of state who presided over Al Franken’s theft of incumbent Republican Norm Coleman’s U.S. Senate seat in the 2008 election cycle.
Until a year and a half ago the Secretary of State Project was doing well. Before the 2010 cycle it took credit for electing 11 of the 18 left-wingers it endorsed since it began funding candidates in 2006.
Then in 2010 disaster struck for Democrats at both the national and state levels. Five out of the SoS Project’s seven official candidates went down to defeat. Only Ritchie and another progressive incumbent, California’s Debra Bowen, stayed afloat in the Republican electoral tsunami. As the Secretary of State Project lost its luster and its funding dried up, the writing was on the wall.
Despite the SoS Project’s ultimately limited shelf life, the idea behind the group was clever in a Robert Mugabe kind of way. A relative pittance can help swing these little-watched state contests, allowing even small donors to play a big role in making all of America Vermont.
Once a secretary of state who doesn’t give a farthing’s cuss about electoral integrity is in power, the undemocratic installation of Democrats in public office may follow. (See Franken, Al.)
The secretary of state candidates the SoS Project endorses sing the same familiar song about election-related issues that we now hear from Eric Holder’s lawless Justice Department.
The left-of-center candidates bearing the Secretary of State Project’s seal of approval typically say that: a) voter fraud is as real as the Loch Ness monster; b) Republicans routinely practice vote suppression; c) voter rolls should never be cleansed of the dead and fictional characters; and d) anyone who demands that a voter produce photo identification before pulling the lever is a racist.
With that said, how do we actually know that the fetid Secretary of State Project is likely a-mouldering in the ground?
Rumors of the organization’s death have been circulating for months.
The Secretary of State Project’s website, secstateproject.org, is currently offline after vanishing from the Internet in July of last year. At press time its Facebook page, YouTube channel, and Twitter account hadn’t been updated since 2010. The group hasn’t endorsed any candidates for the 2012 election cycle and its most recent IRS filings show almost no financial activity since the 2010 election cycle.
Progressive activists involved with the group refused to comment. Contacted by telephone, co-founder Rebecca Bond, who goes by “Becky,” politely refused to comment for this would-be obituary after this writer pointed out that the political committee’s once-impressive website had gone dark.
Bond wasn’t the only one with zipped lips. Wayne State law professor and community organizer Jocelyn Benson, who was beaten decisively in blue state Michigan by Republican Ruth Johnson in 2010, failed to return telephone calls. Benson, who lost by five percentage points despite running in a blue state, being endorsed by the Secretary of State Project, and outspending her opponent by a quarter of a million dollars, failed to return telephone calls.
Longtime Democratic operative Alexandra Visher, who is vice president in charge of partner engagement and communications at the Soros-backed Democracy Alliance, and who has generally been willing to comment on other matters, also honored the Left’s code of silence, failing to respond to emails seeking comment. The Democracy Alliance has steered its members’ sizeable donations to the Secretary of State Project and dozens of other progressive pressure groups with close ties to the Obama White House such as Media Matters for America and John Podesta’s Center for American Progress.
Incidentally, the SoS Project’s friends in leftist groups such as the ACORN-affiliated Project Vote have launched a massive assault on electoral integrity through the courts. Project Vote, which used to employ Barack Obama, and other radical organizations are pressuring state officials across America to drop voter fraud investigations.
Meanwhile, it is telling that at the time the Secretary of State Project was created Bond paraphrased an aphorism attributed to Joseph Stalin. The brutal Communist dictator reportedly said, “The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.”
Bond told the San Francisco Chronicle bluntly that, “Any serious commitment to wrestling control of the country from the Republican Party must include removing their political operatives from deciding who can vote and whose votes will count.”
Bond and co-founder James Rucker, formerly director of grassroots mobilization for MoveOn, used the Secretary of State Project to perpetuate perennially popular progressive platitudes about the Grand Old Party’s supposed track record for electoral malfeasance.
Rucker is better known for co-founding Color of Change, an Afro-centrist attack group, with former Obama green jobs czar and self-described “communist” Van Jones. Color of Change takes credit for getting Glenn Beck off the Fox News Channel. The group also takes credit for getting major corporations to stop funding the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and getting the highly effective conservative public policy group to abandon its common-sense push for voter ID laws.
Now that the Secretary of State Project is either pushing up the daisies or writhing in the agony of death throes how will its originators pass the days?
While Rucker spends his time organizing boycotts and smearing conservatives as racist, San Francisco-based Bond’s day job consists of targeting Tea Party-friendly lawmakers such as Reps. Allen West (R-Fla.) and Steve King (R-Iowa) for defeat.
Bond is political director for CREDO Mobile, the wireless reseller that donates part of its profits to leftist groups such as Media Matters for America, Project Vote, Color of Change, Food Democracy Now!, and the Sierra Club Foundation. CREDO Mobile president Michael Kieschnick boasts that CREDO Action, a network he claims has 2.5 million activists, has given upwards of $70 million to left-wing groups since 1985.
Bond has another role within the for-profit company. Although CREDO opposes the Supreme Court decision that allowed independent political action committees, known as super PACs, to accept unlimited corporate funding, the cognitively dissonant company went ahead and created the CREDO Super PAC anyway.
CREDO felt it shouldn’t “unilaterally disarm,” Bond, who is the new committee’s president, reportedly said. “If we decided to sit this out and be purists on this thing, it wouldn’t change a thing other than help the other side.”
“This allows us to directly advocate for defeat of these [Tea Party] candidates, instead of talking about defeat of issues. This is something we could not have done before” the Supreme Court’s decision in the Citizens United case, she said. Bond claims that only MoveOn has a larger list of left-wing voters’ email addresses than CREDO.
CREDO Super PAC has taken in almost $1.2 million so far, according to the Federal Election Commission database.
Real estate investor Patricia Bauman, a Democracy Alliance member, has given $13,000 to CREDO Super PAC so far this year. Kieschnick, another Democracy Alliance member, has given $30,000 to the political committee since last year. Hollywood actresses and longtime Democratic donors Stockard Channing and Patricia Richardson (from TV’s “Home Improvement”) have each given $500 to the committee so far this year.
The super PAC has also retained a sleazy Marxist in Chicago as a consultant. The committee paid $50,417 to Strategic Consulting Group, the firm of convicted swindler and tax cheat Robert Creamer. An admitted fan of Saul Alinsky, Creamer has reportedly visited the Obama White House close to 60 times since he got out of the hoosegow. In prison he wrote a book widely hailed by leftists that later served as a blueprint for Obamacare. Creamer, who is married to socialist congresswoman Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), also used to be a lobbyist for Soros’s Open Society Institute.
The busy Ms. Bond is also on the board of the Alinsky-inspired New Organizing Institute (NOI), a Soros-funded school for community organizers. The nonprofit created something called the Candidate Project to recruit candidates for city councils, school boards, state legislatures, and local commissions.
These are “the battlefields where life-changing issues are constantly being tested and decided under our noses,” according to NOI. “There are more than half a million local elected offices outside of the Washington gridlock — that’s more than 500,000 ways to influence whether government serves the 99% or just the 1%.”
Maybe Bond has embraced new political vehicles because those who tilt to port no longer need the Secretary of State Project. After all, the dirty work of the Left is already being done on the taxpayer dime.
Attorney General Holder’s minions are doing everything in their power to ignore wrongdoing on the Left. Their failure to pursue truncheon-wielding New Black Panther Party members who tried to intimidate Philadelphia voters in 2008 is just one example. They are also opening elections to massive voter fraud. Even after the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Indiana’s voter ID law the Department of Justice has blocked eminently reasonable voter ID laws in Texas and South Carolina.
Those statutes are racist and discriminatory, according to the Obama administration.
But in reality they are something quite different. Such laws might be the only things that prevent Democrats from stealing the election this November.

According to Frances Fox Piven’s predictions last September:

Professor Piven Predictions: Half true…for now.
The government would begin to “force” higher taxation on the rich
The government will “force” strict regulation on finance
Workers will unite to make “New Deal” style “strikes.”
The strikes should be “massive” and involve millions of non-Union workers.
Unions should lead these strikes, because they have overcome “racism & sexism.”
In a first-time address to the International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers Union, radical professor Frances Fox Piven made some startling, yet predictable calls for unions to engage in social unrest. In light of the George Soros Occupy movement and legislation such as the Buffett Rule, this might seem to be old news. However, the speech was given last September, before any of these radical social ideas collided with the mainstream. What’s left is an apt prediction for things that did happen (demonetization of the rich, violent class warfare) and a dark foreshadowing of what the future may hold (crippling strikes, a workers revolution).

The controversial NYU professor began by pinning down Voter ID laws as discriminatory.

“Thirty state legislators – legislatures – the states that were lost in the election of 2010 are now considering legislation to make it harder to vote for poorer people, for younger people, for minority people. They want to require photo ID cards for registration, voter registration, for actually casting the vote.”

The Occupy enthusiast continued by demanding that unions begin to “force” governments into an arch-progressive agenda.

“Poverty is really expanding very, very rapidly and unions, union membership, and treasuries continue to decline. So the question that confronts us, everyone in this room – me too, I’m a union member – is how to halt and reverse this assault. How to force government to become a job creating engine, how to force government to restore taxation on the rich – they should pay their share – how to force government to invest in infrastructure, how force government to re-regulate finance, and how to restore the slices that have been taken from the social programs.”

BY Alex Newman

Even as the United Nations prepares to massively expand its “sustainable development” agenda at the upcoming sustainability summit in Rio de Janeiro, lawmakers in Tennessee approved a joint resolution blasting the global body’s controversial Agenda 21 — adopted at the 1992 Earth Summit — as an “insidious” socialist plot. All across America, opposition to the UN schemes is building quickly.

The popular measure (HJR 587) in Tennessee was passed by a bipartisan 72-to-23 landslide in the state House of Representatives last month. And on Tuesday, it was overwhelmingly approved in the Senate with 19 in favor and 11 against.

A broad coalition of activists from across the political spectrum came together to support the resolution, urging lawmakers to stand firm in the face of attacks to protect the people of Tennessee. And the efforts paid off: Supporters celebrated its passage Wednesday as another small victory for liberty, private-property rights, and national sovereignty.

Despite being non-binding, analysts said legislators in Tennessee sent a powerful message by recognizing the “destructive and insidious nature” of the controversial UN scheme. The resolution, among other points, urges the public and policymakers to reject Agenda 21, which it describes as “a comprehensive plan of extreme environmentalism, social engineering, and global political control.”

Echoing a similar measure adopted earlier this year by the Republican National Committee (RNC), the resolution approved in Tennessee cites the UN’s own documents to expose the global plan. Agenda 21 policy describes “social justice,” for example, as “the right and opportunity of all people to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment,” lawmakers observed.

Such a “radical” vision would have to be accomplished by what the resolution describes as “socialist” and “communist” means — “redistribution of wealth” from U.S. taxpayers to governments around the world. Meanwhile, the legislation points out, Agenda 21 considers national sovereignty to be a “social injustice.”

In other words, if the UN has its way, Americans would be forced to submit to global authorities as opposed to governing themselves under the framework established by the Constitution. And everything would have to change — education, the economy, policies, taxes, consumption, production, and more.

“This United Nations Agenda 21 plan of radical so-called ‘sustainable development’ views the American way of life of private property ownership, single-family homes, private car ownership and individual travel choices, and privately owned farms all as destructive to the environment,” the resolution explains. “We hereby endorse rejection of its radical policies and rejection of any grant monies attached to it.”

While the 20-year-old global plan has never been formally adopted by the U.S. Senate — which must ratify all treaties — it is still being implemented across the nation by stealth. “The United Nations Agenda 21 is being covertly pushed into local communities throughout the United States of America,” the measure notes.

Aside from the federal executive branch, one of the main forces working to foist the scheme on Americans is a global organization named ICLEI (formerly known as the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives). And it uses a variety of innocent-sounding terms — “Smart Growth” and “Green,” for example — to advance the controversial agenda, the resolution states. As such, the legislature of Tennessee resolved to warn America about the “dangerous intent” of the plan.

Facing a tidal wave of anti-Agenda 21 activism, an assortment of extremist pro-UN groups and tax-funded propagandists have attempted to downplay the significance of the global agenda, portraying it as a harmless environmental initiative. But experts and lawmakers were not convinced, and opposition to the schemes continues to grow.

State Sen. Mike Bell, a Republican who sponsored the Senate resolution in Tennessee, held up the UN’s Agenda 21 in a thick folder for all to see. “There is over 300 pages, like I said, contained in this document,” he explained, noting that the state resolution would send a “message” to Congress. “I can best describe this as zoning rules on steroids.”

Some Democrats, however, did not see it that way. “It seems to me that planning and forethought and trying to preserve our Tennessee way of life is exactly what we should be doing,” State Sen. Andy Berke was quoted as saying. It was not immediately clear why he opposed the resolution because it merely condemns Agenda 21 and UN schemes — not planning, forethought, or the preservation of the state’s way of life.

Still, despite support from some pro-UN Democrats, opposition to the global organization and its “sustainable development” schemes largely transcends party lines. In the Tennessee House, for example, at least half-a-dozen Democratic lawmakers joined with the GOP majority to approve the anti-Agenda 21 resolution.

Activists who backed the measure come from both sides of the aisle, too. “Let’s be sure to thank those elected officials who have the courage to brave ridicule and disinformation in order to bring UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development out of the shadows and into the light,” noted the group Democrats Against U.N. Agenda 21 in a statement urging the Tennessee Senate to approve the resolution. “We can do it. We’re getting stronger every day, and it’s because you are speaking out.”

Of course, the growing alliance seeking to preserve individual liberty and private property in the face of UN plans also includes a wide range of conservative and libertarian organizations. Diverse groups such as the Tennessee Eagle Forum, local Tea Party chapters, The John Birch Society, the American Policy Center, and even the Republican National Committee all played a role in getting the joint resolution passed.

Meanwhile, another piece of legislation on the agenda in Tennessee would do more than simply condemn the UN plan using strong language — it would completely prohibit the adoption or implementation of any part of the global scheme within the state. If passed, the law would ensure that local governments and state agencies would not be able to financially support or work with the vast array of “shadow organizations” seeking to “surreptitiously implement ‘Agenda 21’ around the world.”

Beyond Tennessee, legislators and policymakers at the state and local level all across America are working hard to stop the agenda as well. Several states are already considering similar legislation. And scores of city governments are dropping their controversial membership in ICLEI — with the trend expected to accelerate faster than ever this year.

The UN, however, is moving full-speed ahead toward achieving its goals. Several official documents released in recent weeks revealed that the global body plans to use this June’s UN Conference on Sustainable Development (UN CSD) to amass wide-ranging new powers and literally re-shape civilization under the guise of environmentalism. Even people’s thoughts and lifestyles are in the crosshairs.

The upcoming global summit — known as Rio+20 because it marks the 20th anniversary of the Earth Summit which adopted Agenda 21 — will seek to transform humanity toward what its leaders describe as a “green economy.” It will be chaired by UN CSD Secretary General Sha Zukang, who served as a senior diplomat for the Communist Chinese dictatorship before taking on his high-level “sustainability” post at the UN.

By Aaron Klein

President Obama’s National Security Adviser Samantha Power (And Hired by George Soros for Obama) will head the new White House Atrocities Prevention Board, which is tasked with formulating a response to war crimes, crimes against humanity and mass atrocities.

Power helped to found a global military doctrine called Responsibility to Protect that was also devised by George Soros and several controversial characters, including Palestinian legislator Hanan Ashrawi, a staunch denier of the Holocaust who long served as the deputy of late Palestinian Liberation Organization leader Yasser Arafat.
Power once suggested investing “literally billions of dollars” in a “mammoth protection force” to intercede in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Notorious left-wing radical Tom Hayden recently wrote Power sees war as an “instrument for achieving her liberal, even radical, values.”

In his speech at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum on Monday, Obama announced the new Atrocities Prevention Board to be chaired by Power.

The inter-agency group is to meet monthly to determine methods to use in international conflict, including sanctions and civilian as well as military response-team training.

The board’s creation was the culmination of Power’s efforts that last year defined preventing atrocities as a “core national-security interest and a core moral responsibility of the United States.” The official White House statement marked the first time the U.S. government had made such a proclamation.

‘Mammoth protection force’ for Palestinians?

In a 2002 question and answer session with the University of California-Berkeley Institute of International Studies, Power was asked how the U.S. should respond if “one party or another” were “moving toward genocide” in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

She replied: “What we need is a willingness to actually put something on the line in sort of helping the situation. And putting something on the line might mean alienating a domestic constituency of tremendous political and financial import.”

Power was referring to pro-Israel groups using language some would consider anti-Semitic by implying such groups maintain inordinate power in U.S. politics.

She continued, “It may more crucially mean sacrificing – or investing, I think, more than sacrificing – literally billions of dollars not in servicing Israelis’, you know, military but actually in investing in the new state of Palestine, in investing billions of dollars it would probably take also to support, I think, what will have to be a mammoth protection force, not of the old, you know, Srebrenica kind or the Rwanda kind, but a meaningful military presence.”

‘Uses war to achieve radical values’

Power was reportedly heavily influential in convincing Obama to launch NATO airstrikes in Libya last year, a key test of Power’s Responsibility to Protect doctrine.

In a posting on the bombings at the Rag Blog, a far-left website that is home to radical 1960s anti-war leaders, some with previous close ties to Obama, Hayden remarked on Power’s use of war.

Hayden was the principal organizer for the 1960s anti-war movement group Students for a Democratic Society, from which the Weather Underground domestic terrorist group splintered.

In an article about Power’s role in the international coalition that bombed Libya, Hayden writes that he had “a long conversation with Power in December 2003.”

“I was struck by the generational factor in her thinking,” relates Hayden. “If she had experienced Vietnam in her early 20s, I felt, she would have joined the radical left, suspicious always of American power.”

Continued Hayden: “But as an Irish internationalist witnessing death and destruction in the former Yugoslavia, she wondered how the United States could be neutral. She strongly favored the American intervention and air war that followed.”

Hayden contended that Power’s Balkans experience led her to become an advocate of American and NATO military intervention in humanitarian crises.

“She began to see war as an instrument for achieving her liberal, even radical, values,” he stated.

Many Rag Blog personalities were the founders of a coalition, Progressives for Obama, that campaigned for the president during the 2008 campaign.

One Rag Blog contributor is Mark Rudd, a founder of the Weather Underground terror group alongside Obama associate William Ayers. The Weathermen, co-founded by Ayers and his wife, Bernardine Dohrn, sought the overthrow of the U.S. government.

Also writing at Rag Blog is Marxist activist Carl Davidson, a founder of the socialist New Party. WND previously reported evidence Obama was a New Party member.

Davidson, along with Obama associate Marilyn Katz, a Chicago extremist activist, organized a 2002 anti-war rally at Chicago’s Federal Plaza that was widely credited with propelling Obama to the national stage.

Founded globalist military doctrine

Responsibility to Protect, or Responsibility to Act, as cited by Obama, is a set of principles, now backed by the United Nations, based on the idea that sovereignty is not a privilege but a responsibility that can be revoked if a country is accused of “war crimes,” “genocide,” “crimes against humanity” or “ethnic cleansing.”

The term “war crimes” has at times been indiscriminately used by various U.N.-backed international bodies, including the International Criminal Court, or ICC, which applied it to Israeli anti-terror operations in the Gaza Strip. There has been fear the ICC could be used to prosecute U.S. troops.

The Carr Center for Human Rights Policy, founded by Power, had a seat on the advisory board of the 2001 commission that original founded Responsibility to Protect.

The commission is called the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty. It invented the term “responsibility to protect” while defining its guidelines.

The Carr Center is a research center concerned with human rights located at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University.

Power was Carr’s founding executive director and headed the institute at the time it advised in the founding of Responsibility to Protect.

With Power’s center on the advisory board, the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty first defined the Responsibility to Protect doctrine.

Soros funded

The Global Centre for Responsibility to Protect is the world’s leading champion of the military doctrine.

Soros’ Open Society Institute is a primary funder and key proponent of the Global Centre for Responsibility to Protect.

Several of the doctrine’s main founders sit on boards with Soros.

The committee that devised the Responsibility to Protect doctrine included Arab League Secretary General Amre Moussa as well as Palestinian legislator Ashrawi.

Two of the global group’s advisory board members, Ramesh Thakur and Gareth Evans, are the original founders of the doctrine, with the duo even coining the term “responsibility to protect.”

Thakur and Evans sit on multiple boards with Soros.

The Open Society is one of only three nongovernmental funders of the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect. Government sponsors include Australia, Belgium, Canada, the Netherlands, Norway, Rwanda and the U.K.

Board members of the group include former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, former Ireland President Mary Robinson and South African activist Desmond Tutu. Robinson and Tutu have recently made solidarity visits to the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip as members of a group called The Elders, which includes former President Jimmy Carter.

Annan once famously stated, “State sovereignty, in its most basic sense, is being redefined – not least by the forces of globalization and international co-operation. States are … instruments at the service of their peoples and not vice versa.”

Soros: Right to ‘penetrate nation-states’ borders’

Soros himself outlined the fundamentals of Responsibility to Protect in a 2004 Foreign Policy magazine article entitled “The People’s Sovereignty: How a New Twist on an Old Idea Can Protect the World’s Most Vulnerable Populations.”

In the article, Soros said “true sovereignty belongs to the people, who in turn delegate it to their governments.”

“If governments abuse the authority entrusted to them and citizens have no opportunity to correct such abuses, outside interference is justified,” Soros wrote. “By specifying that sovereignty is based on the people, the international community can penetrate nation-states’ borders to protect the rights of citizens.

“In particular, the principle of the people’s sovereignty can help solve two modern challenges: the obstacles to delivering aid effectively to sovereign states, and the obstacles to global collective action dealing with states experiencing internal conflict.”

More Soros ties

“Responsibility” founders Evans and Thakur served as co-chair, with Gregorian on the advisory board of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, which invented the term “responsibility to protect.”

In his capacity as co-chairman, Evans also played a pivotal role in initiating the fundamental shift from sovereignty as a right to “sovereignty as responsibility.”

Evans presented Responsibility to Protect at the July 23, 2009, United Nations General Assembly, which was convened to consider the principle.

Thakur is a fellow at the Centre for International Governance Innovation, which is in partnership with an economic institute founded by Soros.

Soros is on the executive board of the International Crisis Group, a “crisis management organization” for which Evans serves as president-emeritus.

The group has been petitioning for the U.S. to normalize ties with the Muslim Brotherhood, a process apparently underway with a visit last month by Brotherhood officials to the White House.

Aside from Evans and Soros, the group includes on its board Egyptian opposition leader Mohamed ElBaradei, as well as other personalities who champion dialogue with Hamas, a violent offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood.

The crisis group has petitioned for the Algerian government to cease “excessive” military activities against al-Qaida-linked groups and to allow organizations seeking to create an Islamic state to participate in the Algerian government.

Soros’ own Open Society Institute has funded opposition groups across the Middle East and North Africa, including organizations involved in the current chaos.

‘One World Order’

Doctrine founder Thakur recently advocated for a “global rebalancing” and “international redistribution” to create a “New World Order.”

In a piece in March 2011 in the Ottawa Citizen newspaper, “Toward a new world order,” Thakur wrote, “Westerners must change lifestyles and support international redistribution.”

He was referring to a United Nations-brokered international climate treaty in which he argued, “Developing countries must reorient growth in cleaner and greener directions.”

In the opinion piece, Thakur then discussed recent military engagements and how the financial crisis has impacted the U.S.

“The West’s bullying approach to developing nations won’t work anymore – global power is shifting to Asia,” he wrote.

“A much-needed global moral rebalancing is in train,” he added.

Thakur continued: “Westerners have lost their previous capacity to set standards and rules of behaviour for the world. Unless they recognize this reality, there is little prospect of making significant progress in deadlocked international negotiations.”

Thakur contended “the demonstration of the limits to U.S. and NATO power in Iraq and Afghanistan has left many less fearful of ‘superior’ western power.”

With additional research by Brenda J. Elliott